STEM APPROACH FOR 21st CENTURY SKILLS AND INTERDISCIPLINARY DEVELOPMENT – EFL TEACHERS’ ATTITUDES

STEM/ STEAM/ STREAM APPROACH IN THEORY AND PRACTICE OF CONTEMPORARY EDUCATION, 2025 (pp. 181-194)

AUTHOR(S) / AUTOR(I): Tamara Bradonjić

Download Full Pdf   

DOI: 10.46793/STREAM25.181B

ABSTRACT / SAŽETAK:

STEM education is an approach that has affected all countries of the world in recent years. The study aims to explore English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers’ beliefs about the potential of the STEM approach to contribute to interdisciplinary and 21st-century skills development in teaching EFL in primary and secondary school education. It deals with EFL teachers’ attitudes towards the relevance of the STEM approach for moving from de-contextualized use of technology in learning towards a learning flow that fosters engagement with digital experiences in a way that can develop students’ cooperation, critical thinking, autonomous learning, and their mindset growth. The participants of the study were 45 EFL teachers working both in primary and secondary schools situated in various regions in Serbia. This paper describes their attitudes towards the relevance of the STEM approach in primary and secondary education on the basis of quantitative and qualitative data obtained through teachers’ questionnaires. The results show how positive attitudes of EFL teachers toward the STEM approach can effectively support students’ development of interdisciplinary connections and 21st-century skills. Findings are discussed with regard to teachers’ level of education, place of work, and years of experience intending to reveal their awareness and knowledge of professional skills required for possible application of this approach and to indicate relevance for using the STEM approach in primary and secondary school education. This study concludes by listing the benefits of the STEM approach summarized by primary and secondary EFL teachers in Serbia on the basis of their experience in implementing the STEM approach in the primary and secondary school curriculum.

KEYWORDS / KLJUČNE REČI:

STEM approach, interdisciplinary connections, 21st-century skills, primary and secondary school education

REFERENCES / LITERATURA: 

  • Abdullah, A. H., Hamzah, M. H., Hussin, R. H. S. R., Kohar, U. H. A., Abd Rahman, S. N. S., & Junaidi, J. (2017). Teachers’ readiness in implementing science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education from the cognitive, affective and behavioural aspects. 2017 IEEE 6th International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE), IEEE, 6–12.
  • Akaygun, S., & Aslan-Tutak, F. (2016). STEM Images Revealing STEM Conceptions of Pre-Service Chemistry and Mathematics Teachers. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 4(1), 56. Available at: https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.44833
  • Breiner, J. M., Harkness, S. S., Johnson, C. C., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1): 3–11.
  • Cervetti, G. N., Barber, J., Dorph, R., Pearson, P. D., & Goldschmidt, P. G. (2012). The impact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(5): 631–658.
  • Clark, L. M., DePiper, J. N., Frank, T. J., Nishio, M., Campbell, P. F., Smith, T. M., & Choi, Y. (2014). Teacher characteristics associated with mathematics Teachers’ beliefs and awareness of their Students’ mathematical dispositions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45(2): 246–284.
  • Estapa, A. T. & Tank, K.M (2017). Supporting integrated STEM in the elementary classroom: a professional development approach centered on an engineering design challenge. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(6): 1–16.
  • Fassa, S. M., Tytler, R., Freeman, B., & Roberts, K. (2013). STEM: Country comparisons. Report for the Australian Council of Learned Academies. The Australian Council of Learned Academies, 178.
  • Gresnigt, R., Taconis, R., van Keulen, H., Gravemeijer, K., & Baartman, L. (2014). Promoting science and technology in primary education: a review of integrated curricula. Studies in Science Education, 50(1): 47–84.
  • Guzey, S. S., Moore, T. J., Harwell, M., & Moreno, M. (2016). STEM Integration in Middle School Life Science: Student Learning and Attitudes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(4): 550–560.
  • Han, S., Yalvae, B., Capraro, M. M., & Capraro, R. M. (2015). In-service teachers’ implementation and understanding of STEM project-based learning. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(1): 63–76.
  • Harwell, M., Philips A, Mareno, M., Guzey S. S., & Moore T (2015) A study of STEM assessments in Engineering, Science, and Mathematics Assessments for elementary and middle school students. School Science and Mathematics, 115(2): 66–74.
  • Hedlin, M., & Gunnarsson, G. (2014). Preschool student teachers, technology, and gender: positive expectations despite mixed experiences from their own school days. Early Child Development and Care, 184(12): 1948–1959.
  • Jho, H. (2016). An analysis of STEM / STEAM teacher education in Korea with a case study of two schools from a community of practice perspective. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(7): 1843–1862.
  • Lam, C. C., Alviar-Martin, T., Adler, S. A., & Sim, J. B. (2013). Curriculum integration in Singapore: teachers’ perspectives and practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 31: 23–34.
  • Lederman, N. G. & Lederman, J. S. (2013). Is it STEM or “S & M” that we truly love? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(8): 1237–1240.
  • Madden, M. E., Baxter, M., Beauchamp, H., Bouchard, K., Huff, M., Ladd, B., & Plague, G. (2013). Rethinking STEM Education: An Interdisciplinary STEAM Curriculum. Procedia – Procedia Computer Science, 20: 541–546.
  • Mariani, A. & Ismail, Z. (2013). Pengaruh Kompetensi Guru Matematik Ke Atas Amalan Pengajaran Kreatif. 2nd International Seminar on Quality and Affordable Education (ISQAE 2013), 181–187.
  • Moore, T. J. (2008). STEM integration: Crossing disciplinary borders to promote learning and engagement. Invited presentation to the faculty and graduate students of the UTeach Engineering, UTeach Natural Sciences, and STEM Education program area at University of Texas at Austin, December 15, 2008.
  • Nadelson, L. S., Callahan, J., Pyke, P., Hay, A., Dance, M., & Pfiester, J. (2013). Teacher STEM perception and preparation: Inquiry-based STEM professional development for elementary teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 106(2): 157–168.
  • National Society of Professional Engineers. (2013). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. (NSPE Position Statement No. 1768). Available at: https://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/resources/
  • P21- Partnership for the 21st Century Learning. (2015). Framework for 21st century learning. Available at: http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/P21_framework_0515.pdf
  • Ring, E.A., Dare, E.A. Crotty, E. A., & Roehrig, G.H. (2017) The evolution of Teacher conceptions of STEM Education throughout an intensive professional development experience, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 28 (5): 444–467.
  • Roehrig, G. H., Moore, T. J., Wang, H. & Park, M. S. (2012). Is adding the E enough? Investigating the impact of K-12 engineering standards on the implementation of STEM integration. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1): 31–44.
  • Schreiner, C., & Sjøberg, S. (2007). Science education and youth’s identity construction—Two incompatible projects? In: D. Corrigan, J. Dillon, & R. Gunstone (eds.), The Re-Emergence of Values in the Science Curriculum, Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers, 231–249.
  • Yeung, S. Y. S. & Lam, C. C. (2007). Teachers’ conception of curriculum integration: a problem hindering its implementation in Hong Kong. Education Journal, 35(2): 109–144.
  • Wagner, T. (2008). Rigor redefined. Educational Leadership, 66(2): 20–24.